Governor PBJ campaigned for Governor on the reforming Louisiana's image. One of the policy platforms he ran on was: (pdf alert)
Provide citizens on-line, easy-to-understand access to all sectors of state government
We should upgrade Louisiana's sunshine laws to improve access to public records and meetings by expanding Internet-based access to filings,
reports, and announcements in all departments.
Presumably, he meant to include the Governor's Office in "state government." Since the special session that he called last year to reform the ethics laws, and let the sunshine filter into the state government, he has touted the reforms he pushed through the Legislature.
However, he has restricted public access to documents, filings, and reports that his office deals with. And I don't just mean his office, but the entirety of the Executive Branch of the Louisiana government. Current law allows for Governor PBJ to shield documents under the custody of his press secretary, legislative director, director of boards and commissions, and other officials on his executive staff, as well as all records in the Homeland Security Office as well as the State Military Department.
Trying to get a Freedom of Information Act request out of the Governor's office is so difficult that the Citizen Access Project, a program undertaken by the Marion Brechner Institute for Open Government at the University of Florida, declared that Louisiana's open records laws, "particularly when applied to the Governor's office, [are] the darkest sunshine laws" in the nation.
The poll that I linked to earlier on the 2010 Senate race has some really useful information for politicians considering running against Vitter, but also tells about how Louisianans feel about a few of their elected officials:
Candidate
Very Favorable
Favorable
Unfavorable
Very Unfavorable
No Opinion
Net (Fav - Unfav)
President Obama
14%
33%
31%
13%
9%
3
Sinator Vitter
12%
37%
21%
21%
9%
7
Governor PBJ
21%
33%
23%
16%
7%
15
Sec State Dardenne
15%
33%
12%
10%
30%
26
Governor PBJ has a net favorable/unfavorable rating of 15. Only 54% of Louisianans now have a favorable opinion of him, and that's after it was in the 60's for most of last year. Why folks are surprised that PBJ's numbers aren't that hot is beyond me, really. He's had a rough year and a third as Governor thus far:
He is misperceiving the public mood out there ... folks actually want the government to step in and fix the problem. They are realizing that the robber barons of Wall Street caused this problem, not the government. And they also realize that the only entity with any power to rein in said robber barons is ... well ... the government. And his speech last Tuesday night made that crystal clear to Louisianans.
Events like this aren't gonna help, especially when the Governor is committing what they call political suicide in Texas by leaving millions in federal money on the table.
The news came today that Governor PBJ has appointed one of his major campaign contributors to the Board of Regents. That campaign contributor is Mrs. Charlotte Bollinger:
Donor
Address
Date
Amount of Donation
Charlotte Bollinger
P.O. Box 250
Lockport, LA
10/15/2003
$1,000
Bollinger Fourchon Inc.
P.O. Box 250
Lockport, LA
10/15/2003
$4,000
Bollinger Fourchon Inc.
P.O. Box 250
Lockport, LA
11/7/2003
$1,000
Bollinger Fourchon Inc.
P.O. Box 250
Lockport, LA
11/7/2003
$1,000
Charlotte Bollinger
P.O. Box 250
Lockport, LA
5/11/2007
$250
Charlotte Bollinger
P.O. Box 250
Lockport, LA
6/11/2007
$1,000
TOTALS
$8,250
The donations from Bollinger Fourchon Inc. are included, as they are from the same P.O. Box as the donations from Mrs. Charlotte Bollinger, which leads me to believe that she controls the pursestrings of Bollinger Fourchon Inc.
Of course, Mrs. Charlotte Bollinger is of the Bollinger family, the ones who own and run Bollinger Shipyards and various subsidiaries, which donated an additional $22,000 to Governor PBJ's gubernatorial campaigns in 2003 and 2007. Seems to be that in order to get an appointment to any board that the Governor controls, one needs to donate substantial sums of money.
Days before Governor PBJ heads to Iowa, ostensibly to inflame the hearts and minds of the nation's Christian conservatives, The Ouachita Citizen's Sam Hanna, Jr., penned an impressive editorial, entitled Jindal May Be Acting Prematurely:
"As we all know as well, Jindal's stock has been rising as of late among Republicans, who have been scratching their heads on the heels of John McCain's defeat at the hands of Barack Obama. In other words, Jindal's success as governor in Louisiana, though narrow in scope, has catapulted him onto a list of rising stars in the GOP. And yes, discussion about who will take on Obama in 2012 is already being bantered about ..."
Yet, Jindal should be reminded that he is the governor of a state (Louisiana), which faces a host of problems, including a projected $1 billion revenue shortfall that his administration and the Legislature must tackle when they craft the state's spending plan for the 2009-10 fiscal year. The governor also should be reminded that Louisiana holds the dubious distinction of possessing one of the worst public education systems in the country. Louisiana also can lay claim to being the home of some of most impoverished people in America, while our inadequate workforce serves as a deterrent in attracting new business and industry to the Sportsman's Paradise.
It will be a very interesting year ... to see how Governor PBJ tackles the problem of the budget shortfall, especially since education is one of the few discretionary areas of the budget that can be CUT, along with health care spending, as they are not mandated by our Constitution.
While I know heading to Iowa means that Governor PBJ is already casting his eyes to the national scene, something tells me that the modus operandi of his thus far fly-by-night political career is going to be pulled down to Louisiana for the next few years in dealing with the problems that are coming our way.
And I haven't mentioned the International Paper Mill in Bastrop ... which announced today that they are closing "indefinitely." That's 550 Louisianan families put out in the cold ... the month before Christmas.
I imagine that Mr. Hanna could pen the following lines, and they would be pretty damn accurate:
Where have you gone, Governor PBJ? The Louisianan heartland turns its lonely eyes to you ...
I mentioned in an open thread a few days ago that Louisiana is facing a projected $1.3 billion shortfall in its budget. The blame for this lies with our elected officials, both Democratic and Republican. For the past six years, the business community, (never one to look out for anyone but themselves), called for tax cut after tax cut. And, because the Legislature is afraid of being called anti-business, they acquiesced. But that's not the whole story ... they also increased spending instead of saving enough for the lean times, which is projected to occur in the next fiscal year.
Such a shortfall poses a significant problem, as much of the budget is constitutionally mandated, with the incredible exception of education and health care spending, which is discretionary.
This means that the Legislature cannot cut the budgets of anything without revising the State Constitution, which means, short of calling for a new Constitutional Convention to write yet another State Constitution, the Legislature will have to put any such constitutional changes to the voters.
All this means is that Governor PBJ will face the first true test of his term as Governor. Does he be pragmatic, and call for a tax raise; or, does he act like a Republican ideologue, and slash education and health care spending?
As frequent commentator and contributor Matt D said to me the other day:
"I love the GOP, man. Sometimes, you just gotta give it to them.
Is the education system doing well? Cut their funding, we're probably overspending.
is the education system doing poorly? Cut their funding, and they'll use market-based solutions to improve it themselves."
You can substitute any of the services that government provides for education system, with the exception of infrastructure spending, and the military, and it'll work. That's how easy it is to be Republican.
Of course, in the real world, their solutions don't always work. And education funding and health care funding are the two "discretionary" items we can least afford to cut right now. But I bet you won't be hearing that from the statewide media over the next few months, nor will you hear how the tax cuts enacted for the last six years are contributing to the problem.
Over the last few weeks, Governor PBJ has been on the road stumping for Republican candidates. Here's where PBJ's been:
Missouri ... raising money for Republican gubernatorial candidate Kenny Hulshof.
Mississippi ... raising money for ethically challenged Republican Senate candidate Roger Wicker.
Florida ... on the day that the Tigers were given a wake-up call in Gainesville, he was raising money for himself while touting Republican presidential candidate John McCain.
Texas ... raising money in Houston for Republican hopeful Pete Olson, running for Congress in TX-22, Tom DeLay's old seat, currently represented by Nick Lampson, a Texas Democrat before hosting a fundraiser for himself.
That's where Governor PBJ's been for the past month ... raising money for Republican candidates and himself in Missouri, Texas, Mississippi and Florida. Pray tell, why is he raising campaign cash in states that he will NOT represent?
Could it be ... that he's getting ready to run for President in 2012? The definitive proof is shown at the right.
Now, it's normal for rising stars in politics to travel the country stumping for other political candidates in their party. Indeed, Barack Obama stumped for candidates all over the country in 2006. He even campaigned for the Senator from Connecticut that I was working to unseat through the candidacy of Ned Lamont.
But Iowa ... the site of the nation's first caucuses. Iowa, where many a Republican presidential contender was catapulted to the Republican nomination.
And Governor PBJ's heading there a mere eighteen days after the election. Folks, you don't head to Iowa if you're a rising political star just for the hell of it. You go there to lay the groundwork for a presidential campaign, the first step of which is getting your name out there amongst the activists of your respective political party.
And Governor PBJ's already starting the process. The question we here in Louisiana have to ask him is this:
Are you going to run for President in 2012? If so, does that mean you will NOT be running for re-election as Governor in 2011, as running for President is a full-time endeavor in its own right?
Or, should you win re-election, are you going to abdicate your responsibilities as Governor in your quest for the Presidency?
Days after Governor Jindal heeded public outrage over the Legislature's ill-advised pay raise for themselves, legislators are starting to finally let the public in on the secret deal that I suspected back in June:
Beyond the vouchers, it's quite likely that Jindal traded many other things, too. Look closely at this quote from this article from the News Star:
Northeastern Louisiana lawmakers, both those who voted for and against the legislative pay raise, said Gov. Bobby Jindal's veto on Monday was a breach of trust between the executive and legislative branches.
"He made a lot of promises to a lot of legislators, and anytime you tell someone something and don't stick to it right or wrong it's going to create a problem with trust," said Rep. Jim Fannin, D-Jonesboro, who voted against the raise.
One of those staffers is the former head of the Baton Rouge Area Chamber of Commerce, Stephen Moret, where he received a reported $500,000 for his work. He currently makes $245,000 per year, which I believe is some $210,000 more than the average Louisianan. Does he really need all that money?
As Oyster notes, where's all the outrage, folks? This guy is getting wealthy on the public dole! Let's give Bobby hell for this outrageous pay raise, which I might add is about $30,000 more than the Legislature originally sought to give themselves!
This morning, Governor PBJ finally broke out the veto pen on the legislative pay raise. I guess he realized that the recall effort against him wouldn't look good to the higher-ups in the Republican Party doing the vetting for their Veepstakes.
He can now kiss all of his legislative agenda for the next three years goodbye, as a rather curt thank you from the Legislature for breaking his word to them.
UPDATE: According to the NYTimes, Governor Crist of Florida, and former Governor Romney of Massachusetts will spending time there this weekend as well.
UPDATE II: LA Dem Party Chair Chris Whittington has this to say:
"Bobby Jindal has always put his political career ahead of the people of Louisiana and his meeting with John McCain this weekend only drives the point home."
According to the official news outlet of the Jindal Administration, Governor PBJ will be spending this Memorial Day weekend holed up in Arizona ... at presumptive Republican nominee John McCain's ranch.
If there was any doubt that Governor PBJ was considering leaving Louisiana in the lurch over the next 6 months, we now can easily pass the "clear and convincing" standard favored by Governor PBJ.
Yesterday, it came out that Governor PBJ reached an agreement with State Senator Buddy Shaw, who introduced a bill to roll back the income tax brackets that came into existence as part of the Stelly Plan, which eliminated the state sale tax on items such as food for home consumption and state sales tax on natural gas, electricity, and water for residential use, and raised the tax brackets to make up for the lost revenue. This was one of the most progressive acts that Louisiana has ever undertaken to make the state tax code progressive, and fairer to those who can barely make ends meet.
Senator Buddy Shaw introduced SB 87 to roll back the tax brackets for those making between $12,500 and $50,000 back to its original rate of 4% from its current rate of 6%. The Democrats in the Legislature saw this as the first step in doing away with a progressive tax structure, so State Senator Nick Gautreaux submitted an amendment to do away with the state income tax completely over the next 10 years.
The Republicans in the Legislature saw this as a golden opportunity to finally achieve what they crave - a government so small you can drown in it in the bathtub. I think we all saw the results of that in the federal government's lackadaiscal response to Hurricane Katrina. To his credit, Governor PBJ rejected doing away with all income taxes, especially in the face of some pretty severe infrastructure needs here in Louisiana.
However, the compromise is a cop-out. Essentially, the Governor signed onto Buddy Shaw's plan, but delayed its' start date until January 2009. What that means is that most Louisianans won't notice it until they go get their taxes done in 2010! I'm betting the conservatives are going to be howling mad that Governor PBJ is not acting "conservative" enough.
It will be interesting to see if the Republicans in the Legislature go along with this compromise.
For a few months now, Governor PBJ has faced a largely compliant state media that has published fawning stories about him, along with a Legislature that has been predisposed to go along with his wishes.
That's starting to change, prompting me to declare the following:
THE HONEYMOON IS OVER, GOVERNOR!
For those of y'all who are skeptical, here's the proof:
A House committee voted to limit the executive exemption for the Governor's records over the objections of Governor PBJ himself to exempt the "governor and a list of his employees: his chief of staff, executive counsel, director of policy, press secretary, legislative director, director of boards and commissions, director of intergovernmental affairs, director of constituent services, communications director, director of scheduling and "each member of their respective staff" from allowing their papers and documents into the public domain. The Committee, headed by a Republican, Rep. Wayne Waddell, voted to limit the exemptions to the Governor, his Chief of Staff, and his Executive Counsel. The bill, HB 1100, is pending consideration by the full House.
The New Orleans Gambit Weekly has a piece by the indefatigable Jeremy Alford regarding the lack of transparency the Jindal Administration has when it comes to dealing with the press. Apparently, the only press folks they want to talk to these days are the national press. Alford also published a handy graphic regarding the responsiveness of the Jindal Administration to Louisiana press:
- Jan. 31, The Advocate: "Jindal's key aides' salaries similar to Blanco's" - "Jindal's chief of staff, Timmy Teepell, did not return two requests for comment on the governor's payroll."
- Feb. 16, The Advocate: "Jindal gives away tickets to concert" - "Jindal's chief of staff, Timmy Teepell, did not respond to four requests for comment."
- March 4, The Advocate: "LSU Lab School access defended" - "Jindal did not respond to five requests for comment Tuesday."
- March 4, The Advocate: 'Nagin urges Jindal to fund N.O. projects, change ports" - "Jindal did not return a call seeking comment after meeting with Nagin."
- March 4, The Times-Picaune: "Jindal may back tuition tax breaks" - "Jindal press secretary Melissa Sellers did not respond to questions about tax breaks for private school tuition or to a more specific question about (the) effort."
- March 19, The Independent Weekly: "To H2B or Not to H2B: State leaders are working different avenues and coalitions to solve this year's critical shortage of seasonal immigrant workers." - "Jindal Press Secretary Melissa Sellers did not respond to an inquiry about the governor's involvement."
- April 7, LSU Reveille: "Jindal preaches transparency, doesn't follow through" - "Jindal's Press Secretary Melissa Sellers did not return calls requesting a comment for this column."
- April 9, Associated Press: "Former highway safety chief believes he was fired over helmet disagreement" - "(Col. Jim Champagne) said he was fired March 25, after a meeting with chief of staff Timmy Teepell, and left six days later. Teepell did not respond to requests for comment."
- April 20, The Advocate: "Evolution talk cut from bill: Proposed law now calls only for 'objective discussions'" - "Asked for a comment from Gov. Bobby Jindal or for Jindal's position on the bill, the governor did not respond."
- April 30, The Advocate: "House panel to hold hearings in Angola 3 case" - "Jindal did not respond Tuesday to two requests for comment."
- May 8, The Advocate: "Lawmakers: Ethics laws too strict for volunteers" - "Jindal did not respond to three requests for an interview made through his press secretary, Mellissa Sellers. Neither did his office answer six specific questions."
The word ally has four possible definitions, none of which conflict with any of the others. An ally can be one with whom one has a relationship of contract or treaty; an ally can be one with whom one has relationship of alliance or support; an ally can be one with whom one has a relationship of friendship or resemblence; and an ally can be a species with which another species has had an evolutionary relationship. Because there is little to no ambiguity in the definition of ally as it is used in quotidian speech, one is stunned when reading the following report on Jindal's recent visit to Monroe from the 20 July 2007 edition of The News Star:
When Jindal, R-Metairie, was asked whether he remained an ally of Vitter, who last week was linked to a Washington, D.C. escort service, Jindal said: "What do you mean by ally?"
Whatever it is that Jindal may have forgotten, whether it be the various endorsements, the many pieces of legislation, the various press conferences or even the definition of "ally," one cannot but wonder how Jindal can run on ethics and accountability when he is so impertinent and disingenuous with reporters. Is he answerable to anyone? Apparently not, for he could not even tell the reporter whether or not he would support David Vitter if the latter were to run for reelection in 2010. "Bobby" dodged the question, choosing instead to restate the obvious: "There's not an election for three more years." He did, however, refer to Vitter's current predicament as a "scandal," which is, in many ways, an admission of his viewpoint, if he is capable of remembering that viewpoint, of L'Affaire Vitter.
But the last sentence of The News Star article should really give everyone pause, even if everything discussed above is already too disturbing. According to Jindal, his gubernatorial campaign "is about Bobby Jindal and not anybody else." Does the Rhodes Scholar need to be reminded of the basic fact that the Governor of Louisiana represents the citizens of the state of Louisiana, not "Bobby" Jindal? And is not any gubernatorial campaign a campaign on the issues and problems the voters view as important? Or does Jindal honestly believe that 2007 is about a man who cannot even recall the definition of the word "ally?"
While some may view his use of the military metaphor as his attempt to fashion himself as a President Johnson or a President Nixon, a more informed political analyst would see traces of George W. Bush in Jindal's martial rhetoric. For not only are Jindal's pronouncements impetuous and unfounded; he is essentially declaring wars on everything he disavows about himself. No wonder why Jindal had to rush out of the airport hangar immediately after mobilizing and inciting his troops: he was fearing for his life.
"Bobby" Jindal's reported expenditures in his campaign finance report for the period covering 14 April 2007 through 12 July 2007 are incredibly vague for a candidate who is waging what he calls a "war against corruption." Only the most general categories are used to describe each expenditure, a clear attempt to conceal the operations of his campaign. But within all this opaque darkness is a slight glimmer that casts a glow on at least one of special interests deeply embedded within Jindal's inscrutable machine: the oil and energy lobbies.
Witness the following expenditures to a certain Stephen Waguespack of 1306 Massachusetts Ave. SE, Washington, DC, 20003:
Stephen Waguespack
$3,004.12
16 April 2007
Salary
Stephen Waguespack
$3,004.12
30 April 2007
Salary
Stephen Waguespack
$3,004.12
15 May 2007
Salary
Stephen Waguespack
$130.79
17 May 2007
Office Supplies
Stephen Waguespack
$3,004.12
31 May 2007
Salary
Stephen Waguespack
$3,004.12
15 June 2007
Salary
Stephen Waguespack
$3,004.12
30 June 2007
Salary
Although Stephen Waguespack is the only salaried employee of the Jindal campaign who does not reside in Louisiana, he receives a salary of $72,098.48 per annum, the highest of any of Jindal's staffers excepting Jindal's campaign manager, Tim Teepel. His job description must be elaborate, and the services he provides must be viewed as crucial to the campaign. But what role can he possibly play when he is a registered lobbyist with The Alpine Group, a "consulting firm dedicated to providing our clients with individualized lobbying assistance on tax, trade, agricultural, environmental, energy and several other issues," and a law student at the Columbus School of Law at Catholic University? Or is he remunerated at the annual rate of $72, 098.48 as a result of his current status as lobbyist for the industries with whom he engaged quite regularly while serving as a staff member for former House Energy Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX)?
That Jindal's campaign is one of empty rhetoric bereft of specific proposals and rigorous policy solutions to Louisiana's many problems should be of no surprise to anyone who reads this website. This is no different when the issue of education is considered. I quote from Jindal's website:
Bobby Jindal believes we must improve our education system so our children have the tools they need to succeed in tomorrow's economy. That means starting at the local level and giving communities more choices over how to best manage their schools. We must recruit, retain and reward qualified teachers and principals, improve technology in schools, create an environment where schools can succeed and ensure dollars go to classrooms rather than bureaucracy.
This is not a plan; this is a concatenation of diluted Republican talking points. What I see here are school vouchers, tax breaks for those who desire to send their children to private schools and no explanation of how recruitment and technology will be improved if tax dollars are funnelled into the private bank accounts of families who can afford private school tuition rates and not into our public school system. In other words, what is articulated in this short paragraph is the slow but sure evisceration of the public school system from which I and many others at this website have emerged. And this from someone who was President of the public University of Louisiana System from 1999 to 2001 under former Governor Mike Foster.
Perhaps his disastrous education policy is the main reason why Jindal will not attend a gubernatorial forum sponsored by Louisiana Head Start in Lafayette tomorrow at 1pm. For implementing a policy whereby all students are prepared for a life of education at a younger age is inimical to the privitization of education to the benefit of an exclusive few proposed on Jindal's website. Moreover, while Jindal expresses a desire to engage in more aggressive recruitment efforts of qualified educators, his notion of school choice will fail to generate the revenue required to create salary rates attractive to any such applicants.
Just as Jindal's chair will remain empty tomorrow at a forum where ideas crucial to the development of our state's economy, work force and future will be discussed, our state's classrooms will become empty if Jindal is granted the chance to execute his dangerous and elitist education policy. Compare this to Democrat Walter Boasso, who will attend tomorrow's forum: he has made the education of all of Louisiana's children a priority in his gubernatorial campaign.
A 14 August 2007 press release full of baseless accusations with no operable links and citations, despite the fact that it is posted on a website, should not be dignified with a pointe by pointe refutation. But the stakes are too high, and "Bobby" Jindal is willfully running a misinformation campaign wherein he is distorting his record in order to curry favor with Louisiana voters. Particularly egregious in the press release is the attempt of Timmy Teepell, Campaign Manager of Jindal for Governor, to conflate dissent, whether it be Libertarian, Republican or Democratic, with Edwin Edwards. Also disturbing is Teepell's claim that those who have engaged in rigorous opposition research on Jindal with citations and full explications of the legislation on which Jindal did or did not vote are incompetent. For it is Teepell and not the Louisiana Democrats and other activists online who does not substantiate any of the claims he makes in his press release with operable links and citations. But particularly objectionable is the notion that Jindal will not be thwarted. Everything, according to Teepell, is irrelevant, whether it be the democratic process, productive debate or voters' desire to analyze the respective records of each candidate.
The recklessness that accompanies arrogance surfaces in his press release. And it is this recklessness that I will address pointe by pointe in three diaries as I analyze the Jindal campaign's failed attempt to invalidate a media campaign the Democrats are yet to launch. But first allow me to thank them for exposing all of "Bobby" Jindal's weaknesses before Democrats analyze them in advertisements to be broadcasted the next few months. So much for Jindal's "rapid response."
Part I of my comprehensive and definitive refutation of Timmy Teepell's sad attempt to engage in "rapid response" unequivocally establishes the following: Jindal did vote to raid the Social Security Trust fund; Jindal's votes for Bush's budgets and for unbudgeted Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bills during the 109th Congress exacerbated the rate at which Republicans squandered that fund; Jindal did vote against the expansion of health care for veterans and for currently enrolled members of the Reserve and the National Guard; Jindal voted twice to weaken the ethics rules of the House Committee on Official Standards of Conduct; Jindal voted once to derail any attempt to investigate convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff; Jindal's campaign has rearranged the dates of votes and the numbers assigned to House Bills in order to justify and minimize the import of the damaging votes he cast in order to sustain the culture of corruption that plagued Washington, DC, during the 109th Congress; Jindal did support Republicans' fiscal profligacy, particularly in the cases of the "Bridge to Nowhere" and the Republicans' irresponsible budgets; Jindal did accept donations from Tom DeLay, which he is yet to return or to donate to an organization of his choice; Jindal only returned the donation he received from lobbyist Tony Rudy, a member of "Team Abramoff," after the Abramoff scandal became a subject of public outrage; and Jindal's votes against "The Bridge to Nowhere" and for an investigation into the unscrupulous operations of Jack Abramoff only occurred after Congressional Democrats brought these examples of Republican incompetence and corruption to the attention of the media. In other words, I reveal once and for all how Teepell and Jindal are willfully distoring both Jindal's record and the Congressional Record in the unethical misinformation campaign they have designed in order to mislead and dupe the voters of Louisiana.
The second half of Teepell's press release is equally misleading: legislation, particularly its content and its authors, is misrepresented, and bills that never became law are represented as such in order to increase the length of the list of bills Jindal ostensibly passed; Jindal politicizes the recovery effort, mistaking Congress's willingness to assist in Louisiana's recovery for personal effectiveness; Jindal has failed to utilize his position on the House Homeland Security Committee as a soapbox for voicing and for representing the concerns of the first Congressional district and of the state of Louisiana; and Jindal has offered amendments only to vote against them when the bill to which they are attached is considered for final passage. When all this is considered, one sees that Jindal only passed three marginal bills and a few amendments: hence the ranking of 432 out of 435 from Congress.org, a nonpartisan organization that monitors the activities of Congress.
Those unwilling to wade through all the data and analysis compiled in this refutation of Teepell's 14 August 2007 press release can read the summaries I place in bold. But please consider reading this diary in its entirety. Part 2bis, wherein I discuss Jindal's absenteeism and his effectiveness ranking, will appear tomorrow.
This final installment of my pointe by pointe refutation of the 14 August 2007 press release issued by Timmy Teepell, Campaign Manager for Jindal for Governor, will analyze the last two claims Teepell makes in his arbortive attempt to debunk myths that are in fact verifiable realities. The first and second installments are available here and here respectively.
MYTH: "Ranked by the non-partisan system of power rankings as 432nd of 439 members in Congress on effectiveness."
FACT: Rankings by Congress.org do not take into account the bills a member passes and therefore is a flawed comprehensive interpretation of effectiveness. Additionally, they said their 2007 rankings (referenced above) were based in part on "running for higher office" and the "member's minority party status." [http://www.congress.... ]
Congress.org, a nonpartisan organization that monitors the activities of Congress, does account for legislation Members and Delegates have passed when calculating their "power rankings" for the 110th Congress. I quote from their website:
Power Rankings Criteria
Our project team identified key characteristics of power. These characteristics were then measured and weighted to determine the relative power or potential power demonstrated by Members of Congress heading into 2007. We grouped those characteristics into three broad categories.
1) Position: How much power might the legislator wield through his/her position in the Congress by virtue of tenure, new committee assignments or new leadership position? This Power Category includes some new weightings for all committees, subcommittees, and leadership positions, taking into consideration the new majority or minority party status of the member.
2) Indirect Influence: How much power has the legislator demonstrated or may be capable of demonstrating to influence the congressional agenda or outcome of votes through the media or congressional caucuses.
3) Legislative Activity: How much power has the legislator demonstrate through the passage of legislation or shaping legislation through amendments thus far? The team eliminated from that data items which did not substantially change the bill or existing law. These included amendments dealing with technical changes or bills of a ceremonial or commemorative nature such as naming of post offices or other public buildings, or non-binding resolutions that expressed the "sense of the Congress."
In addition, the project team recognized that Members of Congress can exert or possess power that can't be measured by these standard measures. Therefore, we created the "Sizzle/Fizzle" factor. For example, Sizzle factors can include a legislator's unique background and experience (Sen. John McCain, R-AZ) or relationships (Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY) or newfound popularity (Sen. Barack Obama, D-IL) that somehow adds weight to their power that is not scored in the other categories. In contrast, Fizzle factors can be applied to legislators who have seen their power diminish during the year, despite their position, due to scandal or other factors that impair the ability of the member to be effective. This was the only subjective criteria and was not weighted heavily in the overall ratings.
Notice how all the claims made in the commercial are unsourced and unfounded, and notice how "Bobby" only appears in a small still photograph enclosed in a box relegated to the lower margin of the frame at the commercial's end.
Could it be ... that he's getting ready to run for President in 2012? The 
The word 
"Bobby" Jindal was quite the firebrand at the uncivilized hour of 8AM on 16 July 2007 in Baton Rouge, where he implored a gaggle of mindless sychophants to join him as he wages a series of wars. 
Once again we are the victims of the Jindal campaign's many disavowals and projections. I quote from 
That Jindal's campaign is one of empty rhetoric bereft of specific proposals and rigorous policy solutions to Louisiana's many problems should be of no surprise to anyone who reads this website. This is no different when the issue of education is considered. I quote from 
